The Libertarian Party

[BVS]

Originally posted by financeguy


I don't really understand what you're talking about with regard to 'move to the Republican party' Surely in Texas, he has always stood as a Republican representative, right back to the early 70's!

Frankly, I think you're just throwing a bit of muck around in the hope that some of it will stick, and you're now furiously backtracking as you can see that I'm not buying it.

Ron Paul has always been consistent. If he has ever changed a viewpoint, it is because of innate conviction, and not for reasons of short term political advantage, as you claim. I admit, his chances of becoming the next US President are not particularly high.

So you live in Texas and have followed his career?

He ran as the libertarian canidate in 1988 but when returning to Congress went back to the Republican ticket, and dropped a lot of the issues he was very adamant about during his run for president, he pissed off a lot of the libertarian party by doing that.

Look I actually agree with many of his views. I just don't think he's as sincere as you think, I think he's as oppurtunist as any other politician, and don't really care for him much personally.

That's all I'm saying about that...

[U2DMfan]

It absolutely IS a conspiracy that 3rd, 4th, 5th parties are shut out of not only nationally televised debates but in some states have been left off of ballots.

It is entirely in the best interest of the Reps and Dems to have the two party system, it is entirely in the best interest of the lobbyists to have a two party system for which they can funnel money to both sides, ensuring their views are not only heard but basically endorsed on all sides.

You don't need cloak and dagger or black helicopters to have a conspiracy.

The conspiracy is to consolidate power. The Republican hold on the right side of the spectrum could not be tighter, the Democrat hold on the left side of the spectrum could not be tighter.

Ross Perot was an expection only because of money and the advent of 24 hour cable news programs who basically gave him so much free advertisement it probably shoud have been a crime (I'm not really saying it should be a crime, just saying it for emphasis).

[U2DMfan]

Let's pretend for a moment that the U.S. elected the nominee from the Libertarian or Green Party.

Neither would be able to accomplish a damn thing that didn't directly coincide with a Dem/Rep lobbyist-bought agenda.

Could a Warren Buffet or Bill Gates run for President and get elected? Yes, I don't see why not. What would they accomplish? Whatever the congress allowed them to, they'd have to bend over for the corporate interests to get anything done.

I don't agree with Nader on several of his views but his ideas about how corporate interests completely own Washington are totally correct. The only way to fix the problem would be to build a lobbyist-free base of Independents consisting of liberals, conservatives and moderates all alike, call it whatever you want.

Then when you can start getting people elected to congress on a national level. Then, maybe you can make a dent. Until then, it is about the steepest hill you could imagine having to climb.

The system is broken, period.

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by AEON
I think over the next few years the Libertarian Party could do quite well. Both major parties are suffering badly. Conservatives are mad at the spending and scandals of the Republicans, Liberals are mad because the Dems can't stop the war...

I wish it were true, but really there'd have to be some kind of change in law for the two party system to stop at this point.

[melon]

Originally posted by phillyfan26
I wish it were true, but really there'd have to be some kind of change in law for the two party system to stop at this point.

The only way I see this ever happening is through ending the primary system, in favor of a one-day national runoff election, where any candidate can run, with any number of Democrats, Republicans, or third-party candidates being on completely equal footing. Many countries--and the state of Louisiana--currently do this with their elections. Let the top two candidates face off in the general election.

Right now, our electoral system is the main thing maintaining the two party system.

[phillyfan26]

I think the two-party system is a terribly flawed concept in general.

[the iron horse]

A bit off topic, but a good read on how the Bush family and the Clinton's have held and continue to hold the political machine in the U.S. in their grips.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/

[financeguy]

Originally posted by financeguy
My own opinions are formed by an amalgam of libertarian, green and conservative threads of thought, though I sometimes find it difficult to decide which is the more important to me.

In other words, a combination of this and this

[verte76]

I hate the way third party candidates are treated here. It's not fair. It's not democratic. We have a two-party monopoly on the political process. I'll end up voting for Hillary if she's the Democratic nominee because I don't want another Republican president. But I wish we could have a Green president, I really do.